6
$\begingroup$

Suppose there is single sample $X_1\dots X_n$ of binary variable $X\sim Bern(p_1)$ and the following hypothesis is being tested:

$$H_0: p_1 = p $$ $$H_1: p_1 \not= p $$

Let us use z-statistic without continuity correction:

$$z = \frac{\hat p -p}{\sqrt{\hat p \hat q / n}}, $$

where $\hat p = \frac 1n \sum X_i,$ $\hat q = 1-\hat p$.

Fleiss in "Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions" on page 26 states that $z$ is normal just "thanks to the CLT". But this is not obvious to me, because the denominator is also a random variable and we can't use the CLT directly.

Please tell me where can I read about this fact?

$\endgroup$
1
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ It isn't normal, except in the limit as $n\to\infty$. Asymptotically, you should be able to use Slutsky's theorem (after a small rearrangement of the formula to get a suitable "$Y_n$") to deal with the denominator and still get asymptotic normality. $\endgroup$
    – Glen_b
    Commented Oct 2, 2021 at 22:20

2 Answers 2

9
$\begingroup$

Maybe the reason this "isn't obvious" to you is that it's not exactly true.

If $n$ is large and $p$ is not too far from $1/2,$ then $X\sim\mathsf{Binom}(n, p)$ $X$ is approximately $\mathsf{Norm}(np, \sqrt{np(1-p)}.$ and $\hat p = X/n$ is approximately $\mathsf{Norm}(p, \sqrt{p(1-p)/n}).$ This is follows from the Central Limit Theorem and other considerations.

However, that does not quite answer your question. In your expression, notice that you have $\hat p$ instead of $p.$ Again, if $n$ is sufficiently large, the Law of Large Numbers says (rougly) that $\hat p \approx p.$

Therefore, it is not exactly correct to say that $\frac{\hat p - p}{\sqrt{\hat p(1-\hat p)/n}}$ has a standard normal distribution. [In case $n$ is in the thousands, this expression is nearly standard normal.]

Hypothesis tests. Usually, the test statistic for testing $H_0: p = p_0$ against $H_a: p \ne p_0$ would be $z = \frac{\hat p - p_0}{p_0(1-p_0)/n},$ where $p_0$ is the value of $p$ specified in the null hypothesis.

Confidence intervals. However, if you are making a confidence interval, there is no specified hypothetical value $p = p_0.$ The Wald 95% confidence interval is of the form $\hat p \pm 1.96\sqrt{\frac{\hat p(1-\hat p )}{n}}.$ Strictly speaking, this is an asymptotic confidence interval. That is, it is approximately correct only if $n$ is very large.

A slight modification of the Wald CI is the Agresti-Coull CI, which has been shown to be more accurate than the Wald interval for small and moderate $n.$ Let $\check p = \frac{X+2}{n+4}.$ Then the A-C 95% CI is of the form $\check p \pm 1.96\sqrt{\frac{\check p(1-\check p )}{n+4}}.$

Note_ See @Glen_b's link to Slutsky's Theorem as justification for use of $\hat p$ when $n$ is very large.

$\endgroup$
0
5
$\begingroup$

The statistic should be $z = \frac{\hat p -p}{\sqrt{ p q / n}}$ which follows a scaled binomial distribution. This approaches the normal distribution.


But also, the expression $z = \frac{\hat p -p}{\sqrt{\hat p \hat q / n}},$ will be approximately equal to $ \frac{\hat p -p}{\sqrt{ p q / n}}$, it is the first term in Taylor series expansion around $p$.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.